If you look at dress codes you notice that the codes are more enforced onto girls. I think the problem is society and that we have over sexualized the women's body. Boys are made to have pants up and sleeves. But girls must wear long skirts (which are hard to find in stores and inconvenient), cover bare shoulders (which is another reason that females body are over sexualized), bra straps covers, no leggings, over excessive pants, shorts must be a 'modest' length (what gives them a right to decide what is considered modest, this is their own biased opinion), hair must be natural, no excessive piercings, ect ect ect. Why are girls being so forced upon with this biased idea? It is not our faults that society has corrupted the way a female body is. So what!? They are breasts? They are butts? And legs? Why is this considered too sexual and distracting? It is not our problem. Drop school codes. Don't restrict us.

I substantially agree with the claim that the Con is making dealing with hyper sexualization and its causes from society, but I think that the school dress code is exactly what protects that. While, women may want to have the freedom to display themselves however they want to outside of school code, it is the inappropriate dressing that cause school uniform in my schools in the first place. Females were walking around displaying certain parts of themselves that should not be seen. It may be just, "butt, legs, and breast", but it is this display that has hyper sexualized women in the first place allowing men a glimpse creating an imagination and lust for the female body. School uniform protect that by not allowing those scenes of subjection in the first place, so that what we can be focused on is not "sex", or "designer clothes", but rather our studies in school. This is my opening argument and refutation to the Con's first argument.

Though the pro gives good vocation, enforcing of the school dress codes is in actuality slowing down the movement of going onward with desexualizing the female"s body, but showing that by hiding the woman"s body with apparel they are embracing the fact and agree with society"s idea of "hyper sexualization". They are just slowing down the movement and embracing the idea of the woman"s body in being used in raw and corrupted ways. Women are getting punished for being women. For example, it is considered completely normal for a man to walk around shirtless, because it is understandable that the weather is hot, and it"s not sexual or considered immodest for a man to take off his shirt and walk around. But, in the same scenario, say the weather is at also at a temperature so high, the female is still expected to keep her clothing on AND be modest, in school. Causing the said female to feel discomfort, but as long as she pleases the society and school board, it is praised. And lastly, if the clothing is what decides whether the school is giving a good education to its students, then it is off course. A well focus education is indebted to the teacher"s education, and what is offered by the school. Having went to a school, with a dress code that only stated not having chains, covering of the genitals, and keeping hats and anything to cover the face, inscribed in the dress code, this I understand for safety reasons, lenient to short skirts, and tank tops, and of shorts, because the school realized focusing on the education given is more important than what the student body is wearing.
In result the school is one of the top schools in the state. Now that I go to a school with a more strict dress code, teacher"s focus is more towards the student"s apparel than their effort in school. Time is taken out of their education process, because students get sent to the office and out of the classroom. Distress is sent to the working parents being called from their child"s school, asking for them to leave work and drive spare clothes to their children. This is of inconvenience for everyone affected.

I believe that CON gives a good analysis as to why covering up the female's body slows down desexualizing the female's body in society, but necessarily in school. The analysis that Con gave is totally abstract from the question. Con gives the example of how, "it is considered completely normal for a man to walk around shirtless, because it is understandable that the weather is hot, and it's not sexual or considered immodest for a man to take off his shirt and walk around." I am not sure, but the last time that I checked a guy definitely can't walk around the school building shirtless either. In order to make this argument vocated towards not having a school uniform in response o "hypersexualization", one would have to win that the purpose of the school uniform is to keep order and devote attention to class studies. This is done by keeping both male and female in check. As I said earlier a guy cannot walk around shirtless in school either despite how it is outside of school.
The second argument I will concede, but I would like to weigh it with another argument of my own. Without school uniform student's can wear whatever they want to. In society now, people get subsumed in classism and the latest designer clothes, shoes, purses, etc. The argument I am trying to make here is that people get subsumed into a world where they are focusing on "what they are going to wear to school the next day" or "what other people are wearing" rather then what the educationary study is about. I saw this in my school before they got a uniform and all the student's were doing was sitting down and talking about what they were going to wear tomorrow. Even if you don't buy that, what about the kid who cannot really afford these things or clothes for every day of the week. This opens up another avenue for bullying and discrimination against them for what they are wearing. This discrepancy would be avoided if everybody could wear the same thing. For that child it opens up an inferiority complex stopping them from learning, meaning that learning wouldn't get done either way and the scores stay the same.

I agree with Con, schools over sexualize women's bodies and it needs to stop. While Pro states that it creates a "lustful" image in a boys mind and that some may say it is a "distraction". Instead of teaching girls to "cover up" we need to teach boys to show some respect for girls regardless of their outfit.

But if we keep on teaching girls to cover their bodies and that their bodies are a distraction, then the boys will think that it's fine to harass them . And we don't want that to happen now do we?